ORDER 1. The petitioner Municipal Council before this Court has filed the present petition being aggrieved by an order dated 13.4.2011 passed by the Labour Court, Ujjain on an application preferred by the respondent under section 33C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the “ID Act”). 2. The contention of the petitioner-council is that the respondent was terminated in the year 1991 and the Labour Court has decided a reference in case No. 17/1997/IDR and an award was delivered on 22.6.2006 directing payment of back wages to the tune of Rs. 25% only. It has also been argued that a writ petition was preferred before the Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench while passing an order in W.P. No. 6110/06(s) on 19.2.2010 has directed the payment of 50% of the back wages. Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Council, Badnagar has argued before this Court that the Labour Court has erroneously passed the impugned order dated 13.4.2011 directing payment of Rs. 3,87,839/- alongwith interest @9% interest per annum. His contention is that the workman has submitted a calculation sheet alongwith an application preferred under section 33C(2) of ID Act and based upon the application, in a mechanical manner the Labour Court has quantified the amount and directed the payment to the workman. It has also been argued that no evidence was recorded by the Labour Court for arriving at a conclusion that the workman is entitled for a sum of Rs. 3,87,839/- and therefore the computation of the amount done by the Labour Court is bad in law. It has also been argued that the interest has been awarded at an higher rate, therefore, the order passed by the Labour Court deserves to be set aside. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/workman has argued before this Court that the order passed by the Labour Court dated 13.4.2011 is a self explanatory order and the Labour Court has rightly arrived at a conclusion in the matter. It has also been stated that the workman was entitled to continue up to the age of 60 years and the aforesaid fact was admitted by the employer before tha Labour Court. It has also been stated that the workman was entitled to continue up to the age of 60 years and the aforesaid fact was admitted by the employer before tha Labour Court. It has also been stated that no calculation sheet was filed before the Labour Court by the employer except for making a bald statement that the workman is not entitled for the amount calculated by him, therefore, the Labour Court has rightly awarded the amount in question. He has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the records. 5. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that an award was delivered on 22.6.2006 directing payment of 25% back wages keeping in view the fact that the workman has already attained the age of superannuation. The award passed by the Labour Court was subjected to judicial scrutiny and the Division Bench of this Court has enhanced the quantum and has directed the payment of 50% back wages from the date of submission of statement of claim i.e. till 15.4.1997. The aforesaid order reveals that no interest was awarded to the workman by the Division Bench of this Court. The workman in question, as the back wages were not being paid to him, preferred an application under section 33C(2) of ID Act and the Labour Court has directed the payment of Rs. 3,87,839/- along with interest @9% per annum. 6. This Court has carefully gone through the order passed by the Labour Court and the same reveals that the petitioner-Nagar Palika Parishad, Badnagar has admitted before the Labour Court that the age of retirement in respect of the workman in question was 60 years. The order further reveals that no calculation sheet was filed at any point of time before the Labour Court by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Badnagar and in absence of any calculation sheet filed by the Nagar Palika Parishad, the Labour Court was left with no other choice except to admit the claim of the workman and the same has rightly been quantified at Rs. 3,87,839/- which is 50% of the back wages. In the present case, no interest was awarded by the Division Bench of this Court and therefore the order dated 13.4.2011 only to the extent the interest has been awarded deserves consideration. 3,87,839/- which is 50% of the back wages. In the present case, no interest was awarded by the Division Bench of this Court and therefore the order dated 13.4.2011 only to the extent the interest has been awarded deserves consideration. The order has been passed on 14.4.2011 directing payment of Rs. 3,87,839/- along with interest @ 9% per annum. This Court is of the considered opinion that no irregularity of any kind has been pointed out by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Badnagar in respect of the order impugned and therefore, no case for interference in the matter is made out, however the workman shall be entitled for the interest @ 9% per annum only w.e.f. 13th April, 2011 till the amount is paid to the workman. The aforesaid exercise of making necessary payment to the respondent be concluded within a period of 90 days’ from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. 8. No order as to casts.